Citation

Hunt M, Harper DN, Lie C. Accid. Anal. Prev. 2011; 43(6): 2015-2023.

Affiliation

Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2011, Elsevier Publishing)

DOI

10.1016/j.aap.2011.05.020

PMID

21819830

Abstract

Accurate gap-acceptance decisions require individuals to take into account both the distance to and the speed of an oncoming vehicle. The aim of the present studies was to develop an intervention that could successfully teach road users to focus on speed as well as distance. Across three studies, participants judged whether it was safe to cross the road or not when an oncoming vehicle was approaching from different distances and at different speeds. Study 1 trialed two techniques ("standard feedback" versus "three-look") aimed at improving gap judgments. Standard feedback involved telling participants what the actual speed of a car was after they had made an estimate, whereas the three-look technique required participants to make timed and controlled head movements when scanning the road environment. Only standard feedback increased the participants' mean gap-acceptance accuracy (assessed using both verbal and behavioral response measures). Study 2 also trialed two techniques, the standard feedback intervention used in Study 1, and a "two-response" intervention in which participants judged whether the oncoming vehicle was traveling at an atypical or normal speed. Study 2 found the two-response intervention to be more promising than the standard feedback procedure. Finally, Study 3 used video footage of oncoming vehicles to train younger (18-27 years) and older (60-80 years) adults and found the two-response intervention to be successful at improving gap-acceptance accuracies for both age groups. However, the intervention also resulted in more conservative gap judgments from participants in the older population independent of improvements in accuracy.

Language: en